Of Silence and Defiance: a Case Study of the Argentine Press During
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Of Silence and Defiance: A Case Study of the Argentine Press during the “Proceso” of 1976-1983* Tim R Samples The University of Texas at Austin Table of Contents Introduction.............................................................................................................................3 The Argentine Press in Context…..........................................................................................4 El Proceso de Reorganización Nacional, 1976-83..................................................................9 Dangerous Journalists or Journalists In Danger?..................................................................10 Posture of the Junta: Journalism during the Proceso.............................................................12 Posture of the Press: Silence or Defiance?............................................................................14 Ford Falcons, sin patentes.....................................................................................................19 Conclusions….......................................................................................................................24 Notes…..................................................................................................................................27 .: Introduction 2 Due to a regime of strict censorship controls imposed by the military government, many Argentines were convinced that they were on the verge of winning the Falklands War of 1982, la Guerra de Malvinas, with Great Britain. Relying on information disseminated through a handful of nationalized television stations as well as radio networks and print media, which varied in independence, the Argentine populace was largely ignorant to the events of the war. The return of Argentina’s defeated troops with news of a swift, embarrassing defeat at the hands of the British was a shocking and bitter pill to swallow, an experience that left many Argentines feeling betrayed and incensed. Even in 2003, when the commanding officer of the military government at the time of the war, General Leopoldo Galtieri, died, reflections on his decisions sparked harsh recollections of the military’s leadership in the Argentine and international press.1 Combined with wretched economic performance and popular dissatisfaction on many levels, the defeat hastened the military’s move to relinquish power. But the astonishing nature of Argentina’s ignorance to the events of the Proceso was not unique to the Falklands War, nor was it a mere glitch in the media apparatus. Rather, this moment came as the culmination of a long, steady march towards the weakening and worsening of the Argentine press establishment. Under the military dictatorship the media failed to report gross human rights violations – torture, kidnapping, assassinations, and the disappearance of tens of thousands of people – carried out as a response to domestic terrorism. As a result, a National Commission on the Disappearance of Persons was deemed necessary for the sake of clarifying Argentina’s clandestine history from the seven- year military dictatorship from 1976-83, known as the Process of National Reorganization, El Proceso de Reorganización Nacional, or “Proceso.” 3 This case study will focus on the Argentine print media during the Proceso and the parallel “Dirty War,” 2 focusing on journalism and press policies during this period. Special attention will be given to the Buenos Aires Herald, the English-language daily newspaper in Buenos Aires, in an attempt to explore the exceptional role it played in covering the violence that occurred during the dictatorship.3 In doing so, the inquiry will rely on primary sources, such as the archives of the Buenos Aires Herald, as well as Decíamos Ayer, an extensive compilation of Spanish-language press documents and articles published during the Proceso. Interviews and personal accounts by key figures in Argentine journalism will also be considered alongside academic work. The case study attempts to develop a discussion around two general questions. First, how was the behavior of the press during the dictatorship shaped and affected by political, historical and journalistic considerations? And regarding exceptions to the silent tendency of the press – namely the Buenos Aires Herald and La Opinión – how did these sources behave and how did the military government deal with them? This discussion then leads into an analysis of the role of the Argentine press during the Proceso. .: The Argentine Press in Context Before examining the dynamics of journalism during the “Dirty War,” the historical and political context of the Argentine press deserves discussion for its inextricable role in shaping the behavior of politicians, military officials and journalists alike. Argentina’s long-standing traditions of journalism have roots as far back as the nineteenth century. The oldest existing newspaper in Argentina is La Capital de Rosario, which was founded on November 15, 1867. José C. Paz founded La Prensa in 1869 and a year later, Bartolomé Mitre, president of Argentina from 1862 to 1868, founded La Nación. The Buenos Aires 4 Herald, founded in 1876 by the Scotsman William Cathcart, originally named the Buenos Ayres Herald, was founded to facilitate trade while serving the growing Anglo community. Between 1880 and 1910, along with a sustained immigration boom, the Argentine press experienced massive growth. In 1880 there were 165 newspapers in Argentina; in 1895 there were 345.4 During these years, the Argentine press expanded to cater to an increasingly urban and complex society developing primarily around the federal capital, Buenos Aires. Argentina has long enjoyed one of the most prominent and vigorous media industries in all of Latin America. Unlike some Latin American countries such as Guatemala, Bolivia or Peru, in which large segments of the population do not communicate in Spanish, Argentina’s media has not faced a significant language barrier. Rather, the print media has thrived in a society known for avid consumption of literature and media products. Press freedoms were legally established as early on as the Constitution of 1853, which stipulated liberties of expression for the Argentine people, “…to publish their ideas through the press without prior censorship.”5 Nonetheless, during the first part of the twentieth century, the principle of press freedom had already wavered as it was molded by legislation, court decisions and government interference. The most recent Constitution of 1949, “…left these provisions intact, but the protection they furnished proved eggshell thin.”6 By far the single most significant development in the history of the modern Argentine press and its relationship with national politics was Peronism, through the impact and legacy of Colonel Juan Domingo Perón and his wife, María Eva Duarte de Perón, “Evita.” Though Juan Perón did not become president until February 24, 1946, in one of 5 the era’s cleanest elections, he was an influential actor in the relationship between the media and government even earlier on, during his term in the Secretariat of Labor. By 1943, all radio stations had been monopolized by the military government from which Perón emerged, “…with 1,600 journalists and writers dedicated exclusively, it later turned out, to promoting Perón and his wife, Evita.”7 The Perón regime was the first government to fully realize the power of the Argentine media towards political ends, exerting sway over the mass media through direct expropriation, selective advertising, propaganda, nationalization policies, censorship and at times, thuggish intimidation. No doubt aided by the charismatic abilities of both Juan Perón and Evita, these efforts were largely successful in stifling opposition in the press and creating a dominant propaganda apparatus. As early as May of 1945, a year before Perón became president, a U.S. military attaché reported that, “…Evita was virtually running the government agency charged with censorship.”8 The report determined that Evita’s influence in the Government Press Office was surpassed only by that of Colonel Perón himself. According to Joseph Page, the “…most effective strategy Perón utilized to debilitate his political opponents was to deny them any means of communicating with the electorate. This he accomplished by closing their access to the radio and newspapers.”9 Indeed, the peronistas were largely successful in controlling, directly and indirectly, the stance of a majority of newspapers and nearly all radio stations. Evita, a highly photogenic woman and former actress, played a major role in the Peronist publicity machine with her frequent public appearances and appeal to the descamisados, “shirtless ones” of Argentina. However, both Juan Domingo and Evita were compelling orators, often delivering fervent speeches for hours on end. 6 With a loan orchestrated by the Peronist Party, Evita’s activities in propaganda escalated when she bought the mediocre newspaper, La Democracia, which quickly became an unofficial publicity tool of the Perón regime. The newspaper actually increased its readership with tabloid-style coverage of sports and petty crime along with unwavering support for the Perón regime. Photographs of Evita and glittering human-interest tales were also dominant characteristics of the paper’s staple coverage. Meanwhile Peronist propaganda invaded all walks of Argentine life, exemplified by Peronist sportscasters and tango singers as well as Evita’s “ghost-written autobiography,” La razón de